Khurram Parvez has been in jail for over four years now. His crime? To be a Muslim human rights advocate from India-administered Kashmir who has been critical of the ruling Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP). In November 2021, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) arrested Parvez after having raided his home and office. He was charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), reportedly on allegations of “terrorism funding, being a member of a terrorist organization, criminal conspiracy, and waging war against the state.” Human rights organizations that repeatedly called for his release allege Parvez’s arrest is motivated by his work documenting human rights violations in Kashmir.
As the chairperson of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD), a collective of 13 Asian NGOs that campaign on enforced disappearance, and the program coordinator of the Jammu&Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS), a coalition of organizations that has published several disturbing reports on human rights violations and frequent abuses by security forces in the Kashmir Valley, he has been targeted for his work and advocacy. His arrest has been seen as a part of India’s human rights violations in Kashmir, the Himalaya-nestled territory already marked by a 30-year-long separatist militancy and a brutal military crackdown.
In 2019, the nationalist government led by Narendra Modi revoked the articles of the Constitution that guaranteed relative autonomy to India’s only Muslim-majority state, disputed between India and Pakistan. The move translated into a de facto annexation and an even more brutal repression. Threats, intimidation, and prosecution of journalists and human rights activists in Kashmir have become increasingly frequent since the Indian government intensified its crackdown after revoking the special status of Kashmir and splitting it into two federally governed territories, Ladakh and Jammu and Kashmir.
It is not the first time that Parvez has been jailed with charges related to his work. The first time he was arrested was in 2016, when he spent 76 days in jail after being prevented from attending the UN Human Rights Council session in Geneva for a briefing on the atrocities committed by Indian state forces in Kashmir during the 2016 violence. His and the JKCCS’s work dates back to the early 2000s and has received global recognition and audience. In 2022, Parvez was featured on Time’s list of the 100 most influential people, calling him “a modern-day David.”
Several human rights organizations and NGOs—Front Line Defenders, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the World Organization Against Torture (OMCT), the International Commission of Jurists, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch—have expressed concern over Parvez’s arrest. In March 2023, in another case under UAPA, Parvez was accused of financing terrorism through his work with JKCCS: a few days later, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Mary Lawlor, called for his release.
His story has become emblematic of how, under Narendra Modi’s regime, the UAPA has been increasingly weaponized against activists and journalists in Kashmir but also, nationally, against protesters, students, and whoever dares to peacefully confront the majoritarian project that the Hindu right is bringing forward in India. There have been widespread calls on the Indian government to end violations of the right to liberty and a fair trial and to uphold its national and international human rights obligations that went unheard.
“The weaponization of UAPA is clear from many cases, especially against dissidents in Kashmir, but also in the country in general. For example, in the Delhi riots cases, many peaceful protesters have been in jail for more than five years now, while their trial has yet to begin. The same thing applies to several people who were incarcerated in Maharashtra in the Bhima Koregaon case. They’re from all over the country, some of them have died, some have been given bail, and some of them are still in jail. We are seeing a clear weaponization of UAPA under Narendra Modi’s rule, and the law is being used mainly to deny bail. Most of these trials have not even started,” explains Prashant Bhushan, author and public interest lawyer in the Supreme Court of India.
The implications of the misuse are wide-ranging on civil society and democratic spaces; the law is widely seen as a means to stifle the growing dissent towards India’s increasingly authoritarian and majoritarian policies. The UAPA, India’s main anti-terrorism law, was introduced in 1967 to prevent unlawful activities and associations. Various amendments over the years greatly expanded the scope of the law and gave even more power to enforcement agencies. Most notably, the 2019 amendments introduced a broader definition of “terrorist act” and allowed the government also to designate individuals as terrorists, making it increasingly easy to target dissent without evidence. The changes translated into prolonged detention without charge or trial. Under UAPA, “jail is the rule, bail is the exception.”
In 2019, when the just re-elected BJP-led Union Government introduced the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill, it claimed that the bill would allow for the prosecution of terror attacks in India thoroughly. The opposition voiced their concern and argued that the bill did not contain any provisions to prevent misuse, and criticized the power to designate an individual as a terrorist before being proven guilty. In fact, critics of the UAPA consider the definition of “terrorist” to be too broad and likely to be misused, as the burden of proof of innocence is shifted on the accused, reversing the basic principle of the penal law.
“The current definition of unlawful activity, and even the manner in which the Supreme Court has interpreted it in some cases, has made it even more draconian. For example, in Umar Khalid’s case, they have said that organizing a mass demonstration, even a peaceful mass demonstration, amounts to an unlawful activity, making it totally draconian,” continues Bhushan, who has been a vocal critic of the misuse of the UAPA, often representing activists and journalists charged under it. He argues that the law is increasingly being used as a tool to suppress dissent, journalism, and activism, rather than for its intended purpose of counter-terrorism.
The UAPA has also been widely criticized for its low conviction rate, which is around 2 percent. According to the data shared by the Union Government, between 2016 and 2020, some 5,027 cases were registered under the act against 24,134 individuals. Only 212 of the 24,134 people were convicted, and 386 of them were acquitted. This means that 97.5 percent of the people arrested under UAPA between 2016 and 2020 remain jailed while awaiting trial.
Under UAPA, a person can be in preventive detention for 180 days, but in all these cases quoted above, it is well over that. “They are amending the FIRs, and they are by-standing the time to file the charge sheet. So many people are being acquitted after 5-10, even 20 years. So many people spent half their life in jail,” comments Bhushan, “UAPA and sedition are being used to stifle dissent and crush the freedom of speech—the time has come to see whether they are in tune with the Constitution.”
According to many jurists who echo Bhushan’s view, UAPA has failed on both counts: national security and constitutional freedoms. Prolonged detention without a trial, besides being unlawful under national or international law, becomes a form of punishment without a sentence. Moreover, the continued detention of individuals like Khurram Parvez has a “chilling effect on civil society, human rights defenders, and journalists.” Many believe that this draconian law has no place in a country that calls itself a democracy and are calling for its repeal.
Cover photo: Members and activists of left-wing organisations hold placards during a protest against the UAPA law on June 20, 2024. (Photo by Idrees Mohammed / AFP)
Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn to see and interact with our latest contents.
If you like our stories, events, publications and dossiers, sign up for our newsletter (twice a month).